The Plan Commission considered proposed revisions to the Bloom precise implementation plan (PIP) affecting the exterior materials and a carport/solar element for the mixed‑use project at roughly 4601–4613 Monona Drive (case 2222025). Developers presented two remedies after an installed fiber‑cement siding differed from the approved material: painting the installed siding to match the originally approved chestnut tone or waiting one year to see if weathering darkens the installed material and reassessing then. The developer also proposed removing a covered carport that had been expected to include solar panels.

Noyl Development's representative and JLA Architects explained the substitution resulted from discontinuation of the originally approved hardi‑board product; Noyl's designer said a delta‑E analysis showed a small color difference (delta‑E ~2.2) but acknowledged the visual change. Staff reported the applicant estimated ~6,500 pounds of fiber‑cement siding would go to landfill if the panels were removed and that removing and replacing siding would add cost and sustainability consequences. Staff also said the carport change increased the roof system and solar scope (from 42.5 to 62.8 kW) and increased construction cost by about $40,000.

Commissioners voiced divided views. Some favored avoiding landfill and the cost of replacement, noting paint and maintenance concerns; others said the installed color reads as a brighter yellow/goldenrod and did not meet the originally approved look and that the city should not simply "do nothing." Commissioners discussed interim options including waiting one year to review weathering, requiring repainting now (with warranty/maintenance tradeoffs), or pursuing replacement to preserve the originally approved finish. Several members urged improvements to process (material boards and earlier inspection) to avoid future surprises.

The commission ultimately adopted a motion recommending additional ground‑level landscaping (to be approved administratively by staff) intended to mitigate the visual impact and forwarded the PIP revision recommendation to city council for final action, while leaving open further council direction on painting or replacement. Staff will draft the commission's findings and forward the recommendation and applicant materials to council for its decision.